Wingnut asshattery at its zenith: Obama had gay affair – when he was 10

Can you believe a political blogger, Erick Erickson, at a “serious” right-wing Web site actually wrote this?

The National Enquirer now suggests Barack Obama had an underage, gay affair with a pedophile. Yup. That Frank Marshall Davis guy Barry says was his good friend? Turns out he was a perv of the first order and liked young boys.

This post is not intended to spread that rumor.

Let’s look at this at a few levels. First, a 10-year-old child can’t have a gay or straight love affair with an adult man. They can be the victim of that man, they may have been molested by that man, but they were not carrying on an affair with them. As if – were this story to have any plausbility at all – this would count as something to damn Obama for. As this awesome response points out:

Thatโ€™s a pretty interesting way to describe what may have happened between the two. Obama met Frank Marshall Davis when Obama was ten years old. When people discuss (possible) sexual contact between ten-year-old boys who are not their political enemies and grown men, they usually refer to the “underage gay affairs” as sexual abuse. They also recognize that adults who have been abused may or may not wish to tell the whole world the details, and they respect it. Admittedly, most people are not members of the NAMBLA wing of the Republican Party, or, failing that, curdled into pure meanness. Maybe Erickson just holds with the more sweeping theories about the cultural construction of the age of consent. Whatever the reason, heโ€™s sure that that little vixen, ten-year-old Barry Obama, was asking for it man.

On another level, do you believe the claim, made while blasting the story around the world, that the post “is not intended to spread that rumor”? I mean, can the writer truly believe we are all birdbrains?

And on another level, it just tells us how far the far-right is willing to go to make any claim no matter how looney, no matter how spurious – toss as much shit at the wall and hope some of it sticks. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, right?

There has never been an election like this one. I actually remember when elections were about issues and economics and laws and causes and people. Huge kudos to Obama for keeping calm and never responding with anything even close to the rancor or hysteria displayed by the other side. A dark, ugly day in American politics. What can they possibly do next?

The Discussion: 26 Comments

[…] Whiskey Fire, the Poor Man, John Cole at Balloon Juice, Jim Henley at Unqualified Offerings, and The Peking Duck. […]

October 14, 2008 @ 9:37 pm | Pingback

I agree with you that calling the implied relationship an “affair” is stupid and offensive.

But what do you have to say about the story itself? I’ve always thought that the job of POTUS was important enough to justify a thorough examination of a candidate’s background and makeup. While I appreciate your desire to focus on “issues,” a candidate’s background and makeup ARE an issue. The fact that Obama was “mentored” for seven crucial years of his childhood by a monster like Davis is, let’s face it, a disturbing revelation, especially coming three weeks before the election.

The fact that Obama’s memoir portrays Davis in positive terms suggests he’s either covering for Davis or he really didn’t pick up any bad vibes from the guy despite a lengthy and close association. If it’s the latter, then once again we have an instance of Obama exhibiting ridiculously poor intuition about people (e.g., Wright, Rezko, Ayers).

October 14, 2008 @ 10:03 pm | Comment

It’s just more guilt by association, and where there’s smoke there’s fire. I have been truly, completely shocked to find out what some people I respected and cared about could do. Just like those neighbors of John Wayne Gacy, or of the BTK killer – they all thought he was the model neighbor, a true gentleman. You should read the biography of Winifred Wagner by Brigitte Harmann about the woman who from 1922 through 1939 was closer to Hitler than any woman. Then you can learn how people can be deceived by appearances, and how we can love and care for someone and never even begin to suspect what lies beneath the surface.

We have seen Obama under a microscope for years. I know the seed you’re trying to plant – that if he was surrounded by these monsters, how could he not be part monster himself. Only it’s horseshit. The son of the architect of the final solution, Reinhardt Heydrich, perhaps the only man in history I would call more evil than Hitler himself, became a Catholic priest. I saw him interviewed on television many years ago and he seemed to be one of the most noble, selfless people I imaginable. Yet he grew up surrounded by Nazis and the Prince of Darkness himself, the master planner of the Jew’s extermination.

If you had one shred of evidence, one scintilla, one example of how Obama’s friendship with Davis in anyway turned him into a bad or dangerous person, I’ll be all ears. Until then, it’s all guilt by association and the same tired story – he’s not like us. There’s some monster inside of him that’s going to pop out at any instant. This is the same tired racist bullshit the NRO has been trying to shove down our throats with ever-increasing velocity. Well, it won’t work, and it only makes a statement about the accusers, who are so determined to find anything, anything at all no matter how hare-brained or twisted, to smear Obama and frighten us into hating and distrusting him. Well, I’ve got bad news for you: Obama is our next president. While I have raised my doubts about him, none are based on who mentored him as a child or his friendship with a washed-up terrorist (who did his terrorism when Obama was eight years old) turned university professor who worked with many people including Obama on education reform and once held a coffee party for Obama. The world is in deep shit, and anyone who wants to argue that these amorphous, vague and unproven charges should be grounds for letting Sarah Palin become president of the United States is either insane or has drunk the NRO Kool-Aid and believes their own bullshit. Again, show us the evidence, not the psychological fears that drive you to paranoid delusions and racist fears.

October 14, 2008 @ 10:19 pm | Comment

I’ve been enjoying your blog for the past few months and appreciate the work you put into it, but as a reader I must say that I’m getting a bit perturbed by your political commentary. It’s not that I agree or disagree, only that I decided to read this because it was a CHINA blog.

If you want to blog about how the election affects the global economy, or heaven forbid China, then I’m eager to read; I count 5 posts in the past 15 days that have to do with the election, however, and not one has any mention of China. I get enough liberal AND conservative spin from the mainstream media…I tend to read blogs to get away from all that.

October 14, 2008 @ 11:15 pm | Comment

Richard: You seem to take personal offense at the notion that we should thoroughly examine the background and makeup of the “next president of the United States.” I’m not suggesting Obama’s a monster. I do seriously question whether he has the right makeup to be president. Finding out that he was “mentored” during his formative years by a confessed child sexual abuser does nothing to ease those doubts.

Do you truly and honestly believe the American people have been given all of the facts about Obama? Keep in mind that when GWB’s 25-year-old DUI conviction came out on the eve of the 2000 election, it set off a feeding frenzy in the media. Consider also the fact that the HUSBAND of the Republican VP nominee’s membership in the AIP was given more news coverage than Obama’s membership in a socialist fringe party.

I guess you don’t consider it “guilt by association” when Bush was being scandalized because his GRANDFATHER had ties to a corporation that had been doing business with Nazi Germany.

I’m getting tired of hearing every disturbing piece of information about Barack Obama being dismissed by his fans as being somehow unimportant. I kind of think we SHOULD know as much as possible about the candidates, and let the chips fall where they may. Obama’s people seem more interested in circling the wagons and declaring any potentially unflattering information off limits.

October 15, 2008 @ 12:19 am | Comment

Hah, I’m learning not to ask that question. No slime is beneath the right.
<>

In response to Josh, maybe this won’t apply to you personally, but most Americans are pretty obsessed and worried and concerned about the upcoming elections. If I had an active blog I’d probably be going nonstop on the same theme. Maybe I haven’t been reading this blog as long as you have, but IFAK Richard has always expressed his opinions about U.S. politics as well as Chinese. Anyway, it’s his blog and he can write what he wants to! Be patient. It’s almost November ๐Ÿ™‚

October 15, 2008 @ 12:42 am | Comment

After looking at the erickson blog it appeared to me that his goal was more to discredit the national enquirer and their continuing coverage of Palin. Or goad an obama staffer to say something negative about the enquirer story.

October 15, 2008 @ 3:02 am | Comment

Black, muslin and now gay too!!

If they have to go so far to discredit him it can only mean he is going to win the elections hands down.

October 15, 2008 @ 3:10 am | Comment

“Black, muslin and now gay too!! ”

And his mom is a nigger lover!!

— Chappelle

October 15, 2008 @ 5:53 am | Comment

Josh, this is not a China blog or a US blog. It’s a Richard blog, where I put down thoughts on what I’m looking at at the moment. It has a definite China focus, as you can tell by scanning the homepage. But every election year it goes about 40 percent US, 60 percent China, and sometimes those percentages flip. I recommend that readers who come here only for China stories should skip the US ones. But don’t worry, China will always be at the heart of this blog.

October 15, 2008 @ 8:35 am | Comment

Conrad, I never saw the Dems use Bush’s grandfather’s relationship with the Nazis but forward as a reason not to vote for Bush. It is pat of the Bush famiy history, but it was never brought up at Bush political rallies, never the source of Enquirer stories – or any stories at all, except in the most fring publications. But nice try.

We never know everything about anybody. I wish I knew much more about Obama, and about Palin, who is cocooned and talking only to Rush Limbaugh at the moment. We’ve had years to see whether the depravity of any of these monsters Obama knew rubbed off on him. It hasn’t, that we know of. Anything is possible, but you need to show us some evidence if you want to make this a reason not to vote for him.

It’s not that this story is “unimportant” – it is that it isn’t a story at all. There is nothing there. If you read the Enquirer at all, there is not a single word about the guy having sex with young boys. It’s all bullshit. If you want to get excited by it, by all means do so. But this is going nowhere. It’s is far, far loonier than the Rev. Wright connection, which is believe is a valid point to raise, as long as it’s kept in perspective (many of his clipped quotes, for example, were wildly out of context and would sound quite different in their entirety).

Anyway, if this is the best they can do, if blasting this through the blogs and adding yet another hideous smear of Obama (“not like us”… Arab… Muslim… gay… terrorist… Communist… Socialist… radical… madrassa-schooled… the list goes on), then the Republican party is the Titanic and the iceberg is 20 or so days away.

October 15, 2008 @ 8:45 am | Comment

Apparently it’s going to be ‘gloves off’ for McCain in tonight’s final debate. Perhaps he’ll play both ‘gay’ and ‘terrorist’ cards.

Hopefully Obama will be ready for any nonsense that comes his way. I suspect he will be.

October 15, 2008 @ 9:02 am | Comment

Saying Obama is “socialist” is not exactly a “smear”, in fact his mentor Mr Ayers doesn’t deny being a communist, and the question is whether Obama shares Ayersโ€™ communist views. If McCain had a mentor who was a right-wing terrorist, I’m sure you’d find it worthy of discussion and take umbrage if someone said you were smearing him. If you’d like to discuss whether Bush’s grandfather palled around with Nazis, I’m sure that it would be interesting to hear how that might relate to some Bush policies that could be construed as Naziesque. There are plenty of people on the right and the left who are looking for negative information about their political opponents, but the fact is that it is you and Obama that have been cocooned and not discussing issues with your political opponents; often calling legitimate questions “smears” or “racist”. Palin had interviews with several representatives of the hostile leftist media, and Obama has not. Nobody has asked Obama the difficult questions. Palin showed courage in facing hostile reporters, and Obama hasn’t shown that courage; he’s permanently cocooned, and we may be surprised at what comes out of the cocoon later.

October 16, 2008 @ 1:50 am | Comment

Jonothan, I suspect you know the answer to your query. When questioned about the implications of lying down with dogs for 20 years, the candidate should simply reply;

“Fleas don’t matter! That’s the failed politics of the past!”

October 16, 2008 @ 8:12 am | Comment

Jonathan, you’re bad new: “Saying Obama is โ€œsocialistโ€ is not exactly a โ€œsmearโ€, in fact his mentor Mr Ayers doesnโ€™t deny being a communist…”

To call Ayers Obama’s “mentor” is just another smear. So you of all people have no right to be telling us what is and what isn’t smear. And you know it. The casual use of explosive words – it’s such an easy wy to smear someone. I’ve never, ever seen anyone on the left or the right connect the Bush families’ ties with thte Nazis to Bush’s policies from 2001-2008. If you have, I’d love to see them. If you thought Catie Couric was “hostile” you are plainly nuts. Even the right-winger acknowledged she did a superb job. Go look again and point out a singe sentence she uttered that was “hostile.” Seriously. Then you’ll have some credibility. Until then, you’re just another say-anything desperate Republican trying to lard your sentences with key words that touch on people’s emotions, while you cynically know they are fully divorced from reality.

And Sam, I know you’ve seen the many articles of people Palin’s lied down with, including secessionists and witch doctors, and McCain too – but as with Obama, those aren’t the only people they’ve known. This entire guilt by association thing is total drivel, especially when you know so little about the depth of their relationship. And I ask again, have we seen any of their badness rub off on Obama? If so, do let us know and i’ll vote for Nader. But until then, I see him as the best of the lot and even better for being his own man, and retaining his integrity even though he was surrounded by terrorists and rapists (which he actually wasn’t).

But let’s take a look at Ayers for a moment. From a column in today’s Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Ayers is a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), where his work is esteemed by colleagues of different political viewpoints. Herbert Walberg, an advocate of school vouchers who is a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, told me he remembers Mr. Ayers as “a responsible colleague, in the professional sense of the word.” Bill Schubert, who served as the chairman of UIC’s Department of Curriculum and Instruction for many years, thinks so highly of Mr. Ayers that, in response to the current allegations, he compiled a lengthy rรฉsumรฉ of the man’s books, journal articles, guest lectures and keynote speeches. Mr. Ayers has been involved with countless foundation efforts and has received various awards. He volunteers for everything. He may once have been wanted by the FBI, but in the intervening years the man has become such a good citizen he ought to be an honorary Eagle Scout.

I do not defend the things Mr. Ayers did in his Weatherman days. Nor will I quibble with those who find Mr. Ayers wanting in contrition. His 2001 memoir is shot through with regret, but it lacks the abject style our culture prefers.

Instead I want to note that, in its haste to convict a man merely for associating with Mr. Ayers, the GOP is effectively proposing to make the upcoming election into the largest mass trial in history, with all those professors and all those do-gooders on the hook for someone else’s deeds four decades ago. Also in the dock: the demonic city (Chicago) that once named Mr. Ayers its “Citizen of the Year.” Fire up Hurricane Katrina and point it toward Lake Michigan!

So I guess we have to condemn the entire city of Chicago and many hundreds of people working for the betterment of society who worked with this evil terrorist. Nice try, but this meme isn’t going anywhere – it’s been out for two months now, and Obama’s gone nowhere but up. It’s so absurd it’s laughable – and disgusting, too.

October 16, 2008 @ 8:30 am | Comment

Thinking about all this, I’m not surprised that US-China relations have been so “peachy” these past few years: if you look at this website, the die-hard Bushies and the Chinese Fascist Party blowhards actually have similar worldviews and methods of argument (everybody is just out to get us; we’re not bad, look at them; calling non-smears smears and calling smears non-smears). Perhaps Bush has hope for a position on the Politburo after his retirement from US politics?

October 16, 2008 @ 12:22 pm | Comment

Isn’t this just an elaborate way of saying “Fleas don’t matter! Besides, you have them too, nyah nyah.” ?

And I don’t think the “guilt by association” denial holds much water either, when you consider that the candidate who chose the associations is running for leader of the semi-free world. A better question might be “How relevant are those chosen partners, mentors, and associates in indicating the candidates true beliefs?”

Which is why I keep asking “Is there ANYONE in the circle of Obama’s past friends, mentors, and colleagues who is NOT revolutionary, communist, anti-American or racist?” Something to indicate his own choices might be more moderate, you know. So far I’m still not getting much of an answer.

October 16, 2008 @ 12:28 pm | Comment

Sam, the Annenbergs, the wealthy Republican family, chose to spend time with Ayers as did many Republicans. About this idiotic child rapist, do you think Obama knew he was a molester? The only way we learned of this is from a book he wrote under a pseudonym and claimed was a memoir in which he describes seducing a young girl. There’s no evidence this was even true, and there is not even the faintest hint of evidence the guy ever molested any boy – that was just made up. That’s the issue, Sam. The problem isn’t the fleas – there are no fleas. The fleas are made up by fiction writers and then blasted out by NRO, Malkin, Drudge and the rest of them. Sam, you are a smart guy. Do your research. You’ll see that even the conservative blogs all backed away from this story, it’s so whacko crazy and groundless. And then think about how eager some of you are to find something, anything that will prove Obama is unfit for command. You can’t find it in Obama himself, so you have to scour through his life – and even the lives of people he knew, no matter how casual the relationship was- and find the “gotcha” moments. But this gay rape thing is nothing. Nothing. It is non-existent. I even wish I hadn’t posted it, as we shouldn’t even be arguing about it, it’s so plainly idiotic.

In the debate tonight Obama did indeed name people in his circle who are not members of your categories, Sam. But it’s so easy to take potshots at anyone based on their circle of friends, because most of us have pretty wide circles of friends. Palin and Alaska secessionists, for example. But sane people don’t do this, at least not to the point of grasping at any hint of a rumor and blowing it into a “scandal.” You only do that if you’re looking for a way to destroy another man. Well, it’s failed and America is sick of it.

Kevin, thanks you your comment. Well said.

October 16, 2008 @ 1:20 pm | Comment

You dodged and diverted, Richard. I couldn’t care less about the so-called child molester, and I think you know damn well that’s not what my question is. I missed the debate, so I didn’t get to hear about all the “normal” people in Obama’s life. So my question remains unanswered by you, Kevin, and everybody else except, I guess, the part I missed on the debates.

โ€œIs there ANYONE in the circle of Obamaโ€™s past friends, mentors, and colleagues who is NOT revolutionary, communist, anti-American or racist?โ€ Something to indicate his own choices might be more moderate, you know. Add to that anything in his voting record.

October 16, 2008 @ 1:51 pm | Comment

PS. Believe me, I’d love to trust the man; I think he’s going to be president, he’s a great speaker, and Europe loves him. There are several reasons to be hopeful. So far, however, I find very little to convince me that he’s truthful, open, or competent to handle economic and foreign policy. The first real economic policy journalists have been able to tease out of him is right out of the Great Depression days. Just what we need.

October 16, 2008 @ 2:00 pm | Comment

To be honest Sam, I don’t know who his circle of friends is – nor do I know McCain’s or Hillary Cinton’s or the guy who lives across the hallway from me. It doesn’t sound to me like Ayers was in his circle of friends, which can be defined very differently), and when he was, he was a distinguished university professor supported within his community by Republicans and Democrats. Wright was a US soldier and, from all I’ve read, a good American who said some dumb things that sound a trillion times dumber when taken out of context. All I know for sure is the GOP spinners are trying to weave these anecdotal fragments into something scary, a mosaic in which Barack is surrounded by radicals and demons. And I see not one shred of evidence of that. In a normal election we’d never be discussing this because it’s actually a non-issue. You didnt hear Obama counter McCains reference to Ayers tonight with a reference to Keating – because Obama is smart enough to know that sort of thing is irrelevant to today’s voters. Obama has run an amazing campaign, and has certainly proven himself more adept at diplomacy thant McCain.

Very nice to hear your praise of Obama, Sam. I always knew you were a gentleman. About economics – I am afraid there is no good solution and no good answers anyone running for president can offer (if he wants to win), In this regard, Obama has my deepest sympathies. It’s like being handed the keys to the Titanic (if ocean liners have keys).

October 16, 2008 @ 4:38 pm | Comment

Sam, you’ve got to check this video, highly relevant to the question of the people Obama hangs out with. Superb. Funny, too!

October 16, 2008 @ 7:10 pm | Comment

[…] scoffed at some recent ground-breaking scoops scored and promoted by The Army of Davids.ย  “Oh!” they have exclaimed, between hearty scoffs and sips of imported Chardonnay, “it […]

October 22, 2008 @ 7:28 am | Pingback

When they met, Obama was an unremarkable community organisor and Ayers was a big wheel in the Chicago establishment. So of course Obama would want to associate with Ayers. But what was it in Obama that inspired a communist-terrorist to launch his political career by appointing him to a top executive position? The attention Ayers lavished on to Obama is even more problematic if it true that Ayers was Obama’s ghostwriter.

October 22, 2008 @ 2:30 pm | Comment

Peter, you’ve always been among the most detestable of all my commenters, You are a fountain of Michelle Malkin talking points. You just throw things out with no proof and no perspective. Can you please go elsewhere?

October 22, 2008 @ 5:50 pm | Comment

I still find it hard to believe when people call ayers a communist-terrorist, and that is somehow meant to link to obama. Its has all been said so i won’t go into it in much detail but he was a respected professor and pushing for education reform, and maybe he saw in obama an intelligent person who cared about education and perhaps even that he would be able to go far in politics. Also the “unremarkable community organiser” leaves out his graduating from harvard top of his class, president of the harvard law review, and teaching constitutional law. As for the question asking if there is anyone in obamas circle of friends that is not a radical or communist or whatever nonsense you want to say, you have ayers, wright and this davis fellow, so you are assuming this mans circle of friends consists of 3 people? i think thats a touch silly.

October 28, 2008 @ 1:59 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.